Arena pairing system

Arena tournaments are currently played with a ridiculous pairing system. Instead of players with similar rankings playing each other players with similar ratings play against each other. This means that not necessarily the best players finish in the top places but often weak players can finish on the podium. A few weeks ago in the Arena Kings tournament a player had to get additional rating by chess.com because he played on a new account and beat everyone. Because of his low rating he faced only players below 1600 and beat them easily and earned a ludicrous amount of points. This needs to be changed because it really gives an incentive to lower your rating since you will finish higher in tournaments if you have a low rating.

true

SO ANNOYING. I always lose in a tournament because the i always get hard people and the person above get easy people

it honestly gonna make me stop playing arenas cause the whole system is just unfair and ridiculous. I understand incentivizing  lower elo to play arena but to only get me paired with the same rating regardless or the score is nonsense 

I think anyone should be against anyone and if multiple people aren't playing and waiting those people should be paired up with similar ability

not sure what you mean. It makes sense for sum to be matched with other people of similar level to begin with in an arena,but when they move to be 1st in the leaderboard they should be matched with the first five or ten not still with the midboard just bcs of ranking. Illogical.

That's the design of the site's arena tournaments. It's giving anyone a chance to do well in the event, not just the highest rated players. For that, there's Swiss events.

I think there should be a lower limit cut off point.

I don't want to play sub 500 opponents. Or 800 for that matter.

there is a difference between giving a chance and favoring. Just played a tourney and as always top 3 is constituted of 1050/860/704. at 4th place an IM.

It is not a balanced system and I put arguments forward on why is not.

I agreed. The cut off limit right now seems to be about 200 elo +/- no matter the position you are in. It should totally extend once you are in 1st or last position to probably a good 500/600 elo +/- .

I've seen events where higher rated players top the results as well. It's balanced in a way that allows anyone to win, regardless of rating. It's doing what it's supposed to do.

Also, how much of the event is played will help determine how many points someone can accumulate.

if you don't understand there is nothing I can do to help you. It is clearly not balanced. You literally add zero points to your argument in the whole conversation.

The argument is the site designed it to be the way it is and to allow anyone to score enough Arena points to win, regardless of rating. It is doing what it is designed to do. 

Completely understand you don't like the way it's designed, and believe it's unbalanced, but you're arguing from a stance of a normal style tournament, not within the confines of the design.

A choice of design doesn't mean that is balance or unattackable. 

It is a game, an arena, and it is supposed to be balance. If the design and idea makes it unbalance and unfair it should be changed.

I'm just saying that having in 1st place somebody who barely played against the top20 is ridiculous ,design or not.

That's just it, they're not supposed to play against the top players, unless the ratings are within a certain range. It isn't meant to keep like scores together, again unless the ratings are within a certain range. The goal is not to find the strongest player in the event; that's the goal is a Swiss system event. The goal is to give essentially equal ability for any rating to score well in the event.

Other sites may do arenas differently, but that doesn't make the site's implementation wrong. I get that you don't agree.

As said before, the matchmaking probably works on a 200+/- differential. At least the differential should increase when they get to the first positions. 

Otherwise why not doing arenas simply based on elo then if there is no way to be matched against people of higher elo?( like from 0 to 1000/ 1000 to 1800/ 1800 max, this would make more sense then.)

Basically it is a public/private arena that gets shared on the leaderboard but not on the field. Weird nonsense.

Did you know??

That Magnus car lain might be among us

Carlson